Login

**Maxmars**

(12-20-2024, 08:40 PM)pianopraze Wrote: If by mystical document you mean toilet paper with which they wipe their…

I would agree.

No, not really... unless I miss your meaning...

I value the document... it represents a living hands-on experiment in government.

I meant that, in my opinion, there is nothing in the Constitution, or it's amendments; that rises to the level of sanctity... that it is meant to be changed by rational discourse exchanged in the common dialogue of the nation. Some cling to it like its a religious document rooted in ancient mysteries... some cling to it so they can exploit what they don't want changed.

I firmly agree with the idea of freedom of speech.

Tik Tok doesn't speak... it's users do.
No one is silencing them.
That is the "virtue" ploy upon which the media seems to be focusing.

The discussion is about getting hot and bothered about the "speech" angle... and it is in fact a 'shadow' of the problem. They should have focused on the "What's this crap... the embodiment in the constitution of our nation which singles out "Tik Tok?" - that's not the purpose of constitutional amendments.

But the world of our politicians appears filled with center ring antics... and they are all too happy to play their role.

It isn't Tik Tok itself that's the problem, it the data capture and disposition it provides for China.

The problem is the use of the data... not who happens to be the agency doing it.

It's a problem of foundation... if what Tik Tok does rises to the level of constitutional amendments...how do we justify that ALL "service providers" (many of them ours) within the industry doing the exact same thing... for someone else (we can only guess who.)

Anyway, if I gave the impression that I approach the Constitution will an air of dismissal, I apologize for misrepresenting myself. I was trying to mock the lack of thought that went into this act... (or perhaps it was intentionally crafted to fail on scrutiny... who knows?)